Why cant we get smart.

Help Support CattleToday:

Status
Not open for further replies.
SmokinM said:
Poor upbringing, lack of quality role models and to much free time are huge contributors. A culture that encourages a thug lifestyle probably doesn't help. Not having to earn what you have so you dont respect what others have earned. That's just a start. The list is pages long and race isn't anywhere on them.
I think you're right that race has nothing to do with what makes someone a criminal. So when we have more people of one race committing and being convicted of certain crimes, what should we conclude?

I'll argue that access to employment and income are the biggest determining factors in whether someone commits crime. You don't see people with good jobs selling drugs on the corner, breaking into cars, or shooting up the neighborhood. That applies to all races. People want to blame it on "culture", or the family unit, or whatever, but those are symptoms of poverty, not causes.

Many got caught up in a cycle of poverty generations ago, when it was still legal and normal. Got a big work order for the prison chain gang and need a few more bodies? Just pick up a few black men, charge them with loitering or any made up thing, and problem solved. Of course, now your "loiterers" are generating income for the state, and not their families, so Mom has to go to work, and the kids are fending for themselves. No problem, they get into trouble, more bodies for the chain gang.

When they get out of prison, their odds of finding a job are slim to none. Checking the box that says you've been to prison gets your application tossed immediately from most places. When you can't make money legally, what do you do? Make it illegally. Get caught and go back to prison, leave another generation of fatherless kids, and repeat the cycle. Some get out, and that's great, but they're exceptional, and shouldn't be used as an example that everyone could do it if they just tried.

This cycle isn't unique to black people. There are people of all races caught up in it. But we can't deny that black families were disproportionately forced into that system in the past, and there are still people trying to maintain it today. What was intentionally broken cannot be passively or easily fixed, nor should the victim be expected to make up the difference.
 
I went to school in 9th and 10th grade at a school that was 95% black, if you believe whites are the racist ones you should try that school out for a while. I can give numerous examples of racism that I encountered from black students and black teachers, while there were many who were great people and were not racist towards whites the majority were because that was just the culture there. It was also a very violent culture, girls knifing each other in the face with box cutters guns and drugs at school daily, fights. They would also turn off lights in class and lunchroom and throw chairs and books at teachers and whites. And this is not some inner city school I speak of, this is in rural Arkansas, where the majority of the town was black people who were several generation welfare recipients and public housing. Girls in 9th grade had babies and would plan in class how many they would have before graduation and knew how much that make their welfare check, food stamps and how big their government housing would be based on that many kids who they claimed they didn't know who the father was while many times the unemployed gang banging father lived in said housing with them. Government subsidies are not helping them, it just creates a culture that is dependent and they'll all vote Democrat because of it. And they don't even realize it's just another form of slavery.
 
Black Lives Matter's funding arm, Thousand Currents, is run by Susan Rosenburg, a convicted terrorist pardoned by President Bill Clinton

Alicia Garza, one of three co-founders of the Black Lives Matter national organization, has repeatedly talked about how convicted cop killer and wanted domestic terrorist Joanne Chesimard, also known as Assata Shakur, is one of her main inspirations.

Susan Rosenburg, from the late 1970s into the mid-1980s, was active in the far-left revolutionary terrorist May 19th Communist Organization, which engaged in bombings of buildings and provided support to the Black Liberation Army and is also suspected of helping Shakur escape from prison.

Patrisse Cullors, who help co-founded Back Lives Matter in 2013 along with Alicia Garza and Opal Tometi, identified herself and Garza as "trained Marxists."
 
Buck Randall said:
Ebenezer said:
To think that there aren't a significant number of outright racist whites in this country intentionally holding minority communities down is naive.
To think that there aren't a significant number of outright racist blacks in this country intentionally holding minority communities down is naive.

Curious: what is the % black of your community?

Not sure, but it's low, less than 5%. In my college days, I lived in neighborhoods that were significantly more diverse.

Care to explain what you're trying to get at?
No harm intended. I just wanted to know your experience level. I talked with a friend in SD last week and he told me that he had no black neighbors and did not even have a black acquaintance by name.
 
HDRider said:
Black Lives Matter's funding arm, Thousand Currents, is run by Susan Rosenburg, a convicted terrorist pardoned by President Bill Clinton

Alicia Garza, one of three co-founders of the Black Lives Matter national organization, has repeatedly talked about how convicted cop killer and wanted domestic terrorist Joanne Chesimard, also known as Assata Shakur, is one of her main inspirations.

Susan Rosenburg, from the late 1970s into the mid-1980s, was active in the far-left revolutionary terrorist May 19th Communist Organization, which engaged in bombings of buildings and provided support to the Black Liberation Army and is also suspected of helping Shakur escape from prison.

Patrisse Cullors, who help co-founded Back Lives Matter in 2013 along with Alicia Garza and Opal Tometi, identified herself and Garza as "trained Marxists."

Watch it rider, too many cold hard facts will spoil their illusion.
 
Ebenezer said:
Buck Randall said:
Ebenezer said:
To think that there aren't a significant number of outright racist blacks in this country intentionally holding minority communities down is naive.

Curious: what is the % black of your community?

Not sure, but it's low, less than 5%. In my college days, I lived in neighborhoods that were significantly more diverse.

Care to explain what you're trying to get at?
No harm intended. I just wanted to know your experience level. I talked with a friend in SD last week and he told me that he had no black neighbors and did not even have a black acquaintance by name.

Sure, I didn't mean to insinuate you had any bad intentions. I don't think that your friend's experience is unusual in the rural North. The only black man I ever had a conversation with before I went to college was a Nigerian priest that spent a year in our parish and the Catholic school I went to as a kid.

Had I never left that small town, there's a good chance I still wouldn't know any black people or have any non-white friends. A lot of us live segregated lives, not out of bad intentions, but mostly by accident. It's not good for anyone.
 
See if there are any parallels. In the native tribal culture the chief is the head. Women belong to the tribe. Cross the chief and you'd better skedaddle to live. A woman must prove herself fertile to marry. Marriage does not override the fact that the women belong to the tribe. The women do most of the work. If there are problems with other tribes, they are not part of your tribe and whatever steps necessary can be taken to solve the problem.

If these were gangs, ...
 
Little Joe said:
I went to school in 9th and 10th grade at a school that was 95% black, if you believe whites are the racist ones you should try that school out for a while. I can give numerous examples of racism that I encountered from black students and black teachers, while there were many who were great people and were not racist towards whites the majority were because that was just the culture there. It was also a very violent culture, girls knifing each other in the face with box cutters guns and drugs at school daily, fights. They would also turn off lights in class and lunchroom and throw chairs and books at teachers and whites. And this is not some inner city school I speak of, this is in rural Arkansas, where the majority of the town was black people who were several generation welfare recipients and public housing. Girls in 9th grade had babies and would plan in class how many they would have before graduation and knew how much that make their welfare check, food stamps and how big their government housing would be based on that many kids who they claimed they didn't know who the father was while many times the unemployed gang banging father lived in said housing with them. Government subsidies are not helping them, it just creates a culture that is dependent and they'll all vote Democrat because of it. And they don't even realize it's just another form of slavery.
Don't plan to run for office by telling real life experiences. :eek: I have an idea that the average white marching, burning and pulling down statures in recent times never had this level of exposure. Nor have they seen or experienced the ills of quota, hiring goals, or bias from the unspoken and unpopular side.
 
Ebenezer said:
See if there are any parallels. In the native tribal culture the chief is the head. Women belong to the tribe. Cross the chief and you'd better skedaddle to live. A woman must prove herself fertile to marry. Marriage does not override the fact that the women belong to the tribe. The women do most of the work. If there are problems with other tribes, they are not part of your tribe and whatever steps necessary can be taken to solve the problem.

If these were gangs, ...

What native tribe are you referring to? There are and were a lot of them, all with different cultural norms and customs.

Unless you're an anthropologist or have some good resources to back this up, I'm going to call it nonsense.
 
Tucker Carlson famously called white supremacy a hoax not that long ago. Now his top writer has resigned after being outed as a white supremacist.

Fair warning, some of the quotes in the article are vile. Definitely not a case of someone overreacting to an innocuous comment.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/10/media/tucker-carlson-writer-blake-neff/index.html
 
There is no doubt in my mind that prejudices and racist views occur in all people groups. This area is predominately white with a minority of African Americans, and in more recent times Hispanics. I witnessed some pretty vile examples of racist views, in ordinary settings so much so that I started to see the ugliness of it and distanced myself from those individuals during my high school days and as a young adult it was hard not to take notice of how out in the open and a part of daily culture for some. I have seen a lot of change over time but there is still a significant amount of prejudice around.
 
The government herded the masses to the inner cities and metro areas when they took over the farming and forced people out of rural areas. It was the new form of slavery. Black Americans may have been affected worse but white Americans were affected as well. It was all a ploy to have them become dependent on the govt handouts so that they could control the vote, thereby keeping their position of power. Worked like a charm. We can't all be equal on all levels. That's a fantasy. Some people are smarter than others. Some people are gonna always have more money than others. Some people are better looking than others. Some are more athletic than others. The only place we are equal are in the eyes of our Maker.

And the most ironic thing about it all is that the one faction that is most guilty of oppressing the "lower class" (black and white equally) is the Democratic Party. Without oppression the Democrats don't have a leg to stand on and would be without a job resulting in them have to go back to work everyday like I do. But who does the lower class support? Definition of ironic.

I can tell you one thing. Down here in rural South Georgia I have a lot of black friends. Think more highly of some of them than I do some of my own family. Help them when I can. You know why? Bc they treat me as an equal and don't act like I owe them something. And I'm not an anomaly. The majority of people where I'm from feel the same way. We don't have all that BS down here. Someone starts talking that racial sh:t and we shut it down. And that's coming from personal experience.

Don't get me wrong. Racism exists. But not on the level that the media and the Democrats want you to think it does. Peace doesn't sell. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would be homeless if they couldn't stir the pot! And to quote Forrest Gump "That's all I have to say about that."
 
Buck Randall said:
Tucker Carlson famously called white supremacy a hoax not that long ago. Now his top writer has resigned after being outed as a white supremacist.

Fair warning, some of the quotes in the article are vile. Definitely not a case of someone overreacting to an innocuous comment.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/10/media/tucker-carlson-writer-blake-neff/index.html

Must really chap your a$$ when the ACLU fights to defend the Klan's right to march.

Freedom of speech must be defended even when it's indefensible. Ain't America beautiful?
 
TennesseeTuxedo said:
Buck Randall said:
Tucker Carlson famously called white supremacy a hoax not that long ago. Now his top writer has resigned after being outed as a white supremacist.

Fair warning, some of the quotes in the article are vile. Definitely not a case of someone overreacting to an innocuous comment.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/10/media/tucker-carlson-writer-blake-neff/index.html

Must really chap your a$$ when the ACLU fights to defend the Klan's right to march.

Freedom of speech must be defended even when it's indefensible. Ain't America beautiful?
It doesn't bother me at all. Freedom of speech provides protection from government, not the societal consequences of your speech. Klansmen shouldn't be arrested for marching, and white supremacist Fox News writers shouldn't be arrested for writing disgusting things on the internet.

They should, however, be publicly outed and face the consequences of their actions. Their employers have a right to fire them, people on the street have a right to tell them how stupid they are, and businesses have a right not to serve them. That's freedom working both ways.
 
Buck Randall said:
ccr said:
Don't know how the protest of the 60's and 70's ended up being positive for our country, a change in leadership resulted in the U.S. getting out of Vietnam.

Exactly why would historians look back on more recent protests as being a positive for our country?
You don't think the civil rights marches of the 60's yielded any positive change?

Regarding the war protests, even before the change in leadership, Nixon was starting to yield to public pressure. He certainly wouldn't have discontinued the draft when he did had there not been public protests.

The current day protests have done a lot to raise awareness about racial disparities that most white Americans historically have ignored, changing public opinion in a way that we haven't seen since the 60's. Polling has found that a majority of whites now believe that people of color are unfairly discriminated against by our criminal justice system. That's a very recent change, and it almost certainly wouldn't have happened without cell phone video and widespread protest. Much like people were once appalled to see peaceful black protesters sprayed with fire hoses and attacked by police dogs, they're now responding similarly to videos of black men being murdered by police and protesters beaten and tear gassed.

If they didn't commit a majority of the violent crime they wouldn't see your disparity.
 
Buck Randall said:
TennesseeTuxedo said:
Buck Randall said:
Tucker Carlson famously called white supremacy a hoax not that long ago. Now his top writer has resigned after being outed as a white supremacist.

Fair warning, some of the quotes in the article are vile. Definitely not a case of someone overreacting to an innocuous comment.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/10/media/tucker-carlson-writer-blake-neff/index.html

Must really chap your a$$ when the ACLU fights to defend the Klan's right to march.

Freedom of speech must be defended even when it's indefensible. Ain't America beautiful?
It doesn't bother me at all. Freedom of speech provides protection from government, not the societal consequences of your speech. Klansmen shouldn't be arrested for marching, and white supremacist Fox News writers shouldn't be arrested for writing disgusting things on the internet.

They should, however, be publicly outed and face the consequences of their actions. Their employers have a right to fire them, people on the street have a right to tell them how stupid they are, and businesses have a right not to serve them. That's freedom working both ways.

I like where you're going with that. So in Buckville businesses have the right to refuse service to whomever they deem undesirable? Tell me more.
 
TennesseeTuxedo said:
Buck Randall said:
TennesseeTuxedo said:
Must really chap your a$$ when the ACLU fights to defend the Klan's right to march.

Freedom of speech must be defended even when it's indefensible. Ain't America beautiful?
It doesn't bother me at all. Freedom of speech provides protection from government, not the societal consequences of your speech. Klansmen shouldn't be arrested for marching, and white supremacist Fox News writers shouldn't be arrested for writing disgusting things on the internet.

They should, however, be publicly outed and face the consequences of their actions. Their employers have a right to fire them, people on the street have a right to tell them how stupid they are, and businesses have a right not to serve them. That's freedom working both ways.

I like where you're going with that. So in Buckville businesses have the right to refuse service to whomever they deem undesirable? Tell me more.

As long as they don't fall into a protected class, as defined by the government, yes. You can't discriminate based on religion, race, sex, sexual orientation, or disability. If you want to discriminate against people for saying saying things on the internet that you find objectionable, go for it. If they don't like it, they can change their behavior. If you refuse to provide service to me at your business because you think I'm a crazy liberal, that's your right.
 
Buck Randall said:
TennesseeTuxedo said:
Buck Randall said:
It doesn't bother me at all. Freedom of speech provides protection from government, not the societal consequences of your speech. Klansmen shouldn't be arrested for marching, and white supremacist Fox News writers shouldn't be arrested for writing disgusting things on the internet.

They should, however, be publicly outed and face the consequences of their actions. Their employers have a right to fire them, people on the street have a right to tell them how stupid they are, and businesses have a right not to serve them. That's freedom working both ways.

I like where you're going with that. So in Buckville businesses have the right to refuse service to whomever they deem undesirable? Tell me more.

As long as they don't fall into a protected class, as defined by the government, yes. You can't discriminate based on religion, race, sex, sexual orientation, or disability. If you want to discriminate against people for saying saying things on the internet that you find objectionable, go for it. If they don't like it, they can change their behavior. If you refuse to provide service to me at your business because you think I'm a crazy liberal, that's your right.

Oxymoron right there. Of course you're crazy if you're a liberal.
 
TennesseeTuxedo said:
Buck Randall said:
TennesseeTuxedo said:
I like where you're going with that. So in Buckville businesses have the right to refuse service to whomever they deem undesirable? Tell me more.

As long as they don't fall into a protected class, as defined by the government, yes. You can't discriminate based on religion, race, sex, sexual orientation, or disability. If you want to discriminate against people for saying saying things on the internet that you find objectionable, go for it. If they don't like it, they can change their behavior. If you refuse to provide service to me at your business because you think I'm a crazy liberal, that's your right.

Oxymoron right there. Of course you're crazy if you're a liberal.

An oxymoron is a set of seemingly contradictory words, so I doubt that's what you meant.
https://literarydevices.net/oxymoron/

I think you might have meant to call "crazy liberal" redundant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top